• Proposal

  • OIP-64: Partnership with Umami Finance

My main gripe last time was that the gOHM/UMAMI pool has to be incentivized by Proteus. This seems to have been omitted, is that correct?

The main concern for me is the risk of IL on a pool that may never really reach volumes to make up for it. The gOhm position would be very much under the influence of the policy team at Umami. Can you perhaps share more about the vision and roadmap for Umami? Considering I know very little about the Umami overall, this would help the proposal.

My other worry is diverting attention from more important pools to create for Olympus in the short term. I think Umami is always free to establish this pool by itself. But perhaps 1 million isn't that much to worry about if Olympus controls the keys and this proposal could actually work out.

    MrMochi I agree that there is likely to be IL, but to me IL should always be preferred to straight up liquidity mining emissions. Plus we'd have the benefit of more permanent liquidity.

        marls88 Yes but the question is on how valuable permanent liquidity of Umami-gOhm is at this stage? *Deleted a portion as I now understand what you meant by liquidity mining.*

        If Umami uses heavily discounted bonds, then the gOhm-Umami LP will become diluted. That's why it'd be nice to know more about the roadmap for Umami. Because we could take the same Ohm and strengthen another pool somewhere instead?

        I think I lean in favour of the proposal if no Proteus incentives are included. Just would like to see a bit more information and discussion as a whole on the topic. If Umami is not worth acquiring for Olympus, then it's just liquidity building with extra steps. Olympus can create the gOhm-ETH pools itself. But by having Umami partake in the process, they are basically an Olympus branch on Arbitrum. The upside for Umami is considerable I feel but it may leave Olympus diluted and without much to really show for it at the end.

            MrMochi I agree and like your framing of "liquidity building with just extra steps". We could do a case study to see how much OHM liquidity Umami brings to Arbitrum. The more valuable liquidity is second order (e.g. Umami bonding OHM-ETH or OHM-FRAX). It could be that providing that $1m in initial DAO liquidity helps turn the crank and turns into$ 10m of OHM ecosystem liquidity.

              I see this as a win-win. Definitely a yes from me

              uber legit team and project!
              call me biased: i love Umami.
              just bought the dip again.

              Team looks legit from the discord and looking at some of their work, structurally partnership looks well laid out and beneficial for both parties so am in favour

              12 days later

              Seems like umami gets more out of this than ohm... Would like to hear core team thoughts on synergy here

              Ridiculous proposal. Umami needs to sweeten the deal.

              Write a Reply...